The difference is that you started reading the books after you saw the movies, we read the books then saw the movies and for us it was miscasting. Sure they could have used trick, but they didn't so miscasting, and as some others have said, Hugh is too nice a block, he can pull off some degree of anger, but he can't sustain it.

I think you really need to appreciate what the creators of the character did. Just saying you don't give a crap about his height, is disrespecting a CRUCIAL aspect of his character.

Comics are a visual medium. A lot of casting is not about how well you act, but how you LOOK. The great Brando can't do ALL roles, because he may not have looked the part for some roles.

Hugh Jackman is a fine actor. He out-acted Bale in Prestige, in my opinion. But for Wolverine, him being tall is a big deal. He exhudes the wrong aura needed for Wolverine. A MAJOR part of Wolverine's character and what has made him so loved for so long is because he is different. He's not the guy that gets all the girls. He's the outsider, who is violent, short and with a temper. That is the opposite of Jackman. Not matter how hard Hugh tries, and he did in the role, he just can't do what Nicholson or Hoffman could have done in their younger days. Yes, they are much better actors but the role of Wolverine is more suited to them because of their features and their IMAGE.

You need to respect how important the visual image of Wolverine is. It goes hand-in-hand with the performance.

Well, to an extent. But I would argue a good actor can overcome visual challenges. Keaton as Batman for example.

However, this issue of height against Hugh being cast is, quite frankly, stupid. In film he can LOOK SHORTER. The problem is not his height, it's the director's lack of really going for the signature Wolverine look. They could have done that with Hugh. They just needed to get more creative with filming. Sure, it would have been more of a pain in the ass, and easier to cast a shorter person, but they could have done it.

Also, I really don't get the idea that Wolverine "doesn't" get girls, or the notion he is ugly. He's never been ugly. He's rugged, but he gets lots of ladies if you've ever read the comics.

And again, I just want Fox to fix the cruddy script writing. Then I'll start piping up about height. It's classic problem solving. Tackle the REALLY important stuff first. However, it is good news to hear that they're staying close to the 4ish mini that Claremont and Miller wrote. Best, and most influential, Wolverine story told in my opinion.

The difference is that you started reading the books after you saw the movies, we read the books then saw the movies and for us it was miscasting. Sure they could have used trick, but they didn't so miscasting, and as some others have said, Hugh is too nice a block, he can pull off some degree of anger, but he can't sustain it.

Yes, but I have a ton of friends who were huge comics fans before X1 (it's the reason I wound up seeing it, on their recommendation), and they didn't care about it at all. They've mentioned that he happened to be shorter, but it didn't bother them either.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

True, the writing is atrocious and that is th FIRST port of call. Origins was really a joke. Like a super and very expensive gag. But I fear it is still the same "we will stick to the comics" talk to appease the fans, but it will get watered down to PG 13 tripe.

Back to Jackman. There is the height issue but for me, when watching X1 and the others, he just did not do it for me. That could be his height, it could be his lack of embodying the character or just his acting. I just never felt that the character really had the effect he should have on you. Wolverine should jump out at you.

Many have cited Nicholson in Wolf. You can cite Nicholson in anything. The guy grabs your attention. He really owns that screen and you can't help but take notice. That is what Wolverine should be.

Well, to an extent. But I would argue a good actor can overcome visual challenges. Keaton as Batman for example.

However, this issue of height against Hugh being cast is, quite frankly, stupid. In film he can LOOK SHORTER. The problem is not his height, it's the director's lack of really going for the signature Wolverine look. They could have done that with Hugh. They just needed to get more creative with filming. Sure, it would have been more of a pain in the ass, and easier to cast a shorter person, but they could have done it.

Also, I really don't get the idea that Wolverine "doesn't" get girls, or the notion he is ugly. He's never been ugly. He's rugged, but he gets lots of ladies if you've ever read the comics.

And again, I just want Fox to fix the cruddy script writing. Then I'll start piping up about height. It's classic problem solving. Tackle the REALLY important stuff first. However, it is good news to hear that they're staying close to the 4ish mini that Claremont and Miller wrote. Best, and most influential, Wolverine story told in my opinion.

Exactly. To me it's like they've got a great Wolverine, and they're not doing right by him in these movies, at least not since X2. He really does love the character (I did see Hugh not get annoyed when some idiot shouted "WOLVERINE!!" outside the stage door of his play last year, which was impressive, since I was ready to slug the guy myself), and I think if they get a team behind a move that really knows the character and a director who can really handle the material...they can still make a great movie, at least give him a great finale to his run in the movie series.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

Back to Jackman. There is the height issue but for me, when watching X1 and the others, he just did not do it for me. That could be his height, it could be his lack of embodying the character or just his acting. I just never felt that the character really had the effect he should have on you. Wolverine should jump out at you.

And that's fine. I disagree, but that's fine too.

But when it's solely the height thing, I just think it's the least important issue in the discussion. It may be a big deal to some, but it's just not an issue for me.

Quote:

Many have cited Nicholson in Wolf. You can cite Nicholson in anything. The guy grabs your attention. He really owns that screen and you can't help but take notice. That is what Wolverine should be.

But that was Nicholson playing Nicholson in that movie. I wouldn't use that as a comparison to anything else.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

True, the writing is atrocious and that is th FIRST port of call. Origins was really a joke. Like a super and very expensive gag. But I fear it is still the same "we will stick to the comics" talk to appease the fans, but it will get watered down to PG 13 tripe.

Back to Jackman. There is the height issue but for me, when watching X1 and the others, he just did not do it for me. That could be his height, it could be his lack of embodying the character or just his acting. I just never felt that the character really had the effect he should have on you. Wolverine should jump out at you.

Many have cited Nicholson in Wolf. You can cite Nicholson in anything. The guy grabs your attention. He really owns that screen and you can't help but take notice. That is what Wolverine should be.

While I agree an R-rated Wolverine wouldn't be bad (as opposed to people who want an R-rated Bats) I think a Pg-13 Wolverine could work just fine. LOTR and TDK are two fine examples of handling dark, and violent material in a pg-13 film.

Also, I do agree that all the film incarnations of Wolverine didn't quite hit the right mark, I don't blame it on Hugh. Even in X1, at his most anti-hero esque, they still wrote him fairly tame. And there's nothing Hugh can do about that.

And I think Nicholson (younger obviously) wouldn't have been a bad Wolverine, certainly different. Clint Eastwood is always the obvious fantasy cast for me. However, I always wondered how Russel Crowe would have done in the role.

You could argue that every character in the movies was shafted, because none of them are 100% like the source material. Rogue didn't get her white streaks until the end of the movie, Mystique is scaly and naked WITHOUT A SKULL ON HER HEAD, Toad was green, Storm and Jean didn't have the right eye colors (I know, right? What kind of monsters cast this movie). Point is, if you're going to nitpick something about the character's portrayal, then it better be something worth complaining about. Nightcrawler is my favorite character and no amount of scars or shark teeth could take away from the sheer joy of him getting the live action treatment. Compare those changes in character appearance to a foot in height and then you have the right to complain.

Do you think that there was any real conscious thought when the artist that created Wolverine made him short and menacing? Just think about that for a moment. I'm sure that those of you who have ever drawn or tried to make characters, the height of the character is an important aspect. It's not just a visual thing, but it's part of the personality you want to give a character.

It's a fact. Short people are different from tall people. All the short people I have known have always had a certain characterisitic based on the fact of people teasing them because of their size, and them always having to make that extra effort to get noticed. It's been happening since the beginning of time and will always happen.
All tall people I have met are mostly the same. They all share the fact that they have to look down on MOST people, and others commenting on how tall they are. Their personalities are in stark contrast to short people.

Back to the drawings. If I am creating a character and I make him short, I do so for a reason. I just don't make him short just for the sake of it. Something in my head is saying that this character has to be short because I envision a trait for this kind of character. Taking Wolverine as the example, we see how he has been portrayed in the comics and the cartoon series. He is menacing and always with a short-temper and anger issue. I am sure that the artist working with the writer decided that to best portray this guy's PARTICULAR rage, it has to come from a short guy.
Remember, tall people DO get angry also and are menacing. Sabretooth as an example. But the manner in which he is angry and menacing is in different taste to how Wolverine is angry and menacing.
I tell you this now. Do you think Wolverine would have been as popular as he is now if he was made to look as tall and graceful as Hugh Jackman back in the beginning?

the Problem is they made him the A type hero, tall good looking , and good natured except when he get angry. Did I like Hugh as wolverine in 2000, yes I had waited 20 years to see him on the big screen, him being Wolverine. but even then. he was too tall and by the end of the movie too light, but it kept getting lighter per movie.

Do you think that there was any real conscious thought when the artist that created Wolverine made him short and menacing? Just think about that for a moment. I'm sure that those of you who have ever drawn or tried to make characters, the height of the character is an important aspect. It's not just a visual thing, but it's part of the personality you want to give a character.

It's a fact. Short people are different from tall people. All the short people I have known have always had a certain characterisitic based on the fact of people teasing them because of their size, and them always having to make that extra effort to get noticed. It's been happening since the beginning of time and will always happen.
All tall people I have met are mostly the same. They all share the fact that they have to look down on MOST people, and others commenting on how tall they are. Their personalities are in stark contrast to short people.

Back to the drawings. If I am creating a character and I make him short, I do so for a reason. I just don't make him short just for the sake of it. Something in my head is saying that this character has to be short because I envision a trait for this kind of character. Taking Wolverine as the example, we see how he has been portrayed in the comics and the cartoon series. He is menacing and always with a short-temper and anger issue. I am sure that the artist working with the writer decided that to best portray this guy's PARTICULAR rage, it has to come from a short guy.
Remember, tall people DO get angry also and are menacing. Sabretooth as an example. But the manner in which he is angry and menacing is in different taste to how Wolverine is angry and menacing.
I tell you this now. Do you think Wolverine would have been as popular as he is now if he was made to look as tall and graceful as Hugh Jackman back in the beginning?

^this

I think the height issue affects ppl differently. For some, it doesn't really matter. And I respect that.

But, for others, like myself, it IS a big deal. And that's because, that's how Wolverine was originally intended to be. For me, it IS part of his character.

Just like truth said, the creators made a conscious decision to make Wolverine short. Now whether it was originally 5'5" or 5'3", the fact is, Wolverine was intentionally created to be shorter than the typical male superhero.

And the reason why I'm particularly passionate about the issue is because I'm Wolverine's height! I'm 5'3" inches myself. Even if by some miracle, at the age of 27, I'm able to grow a bit more, I'm still going to be stuck around this height. So....yeah...I'm a short guy myself. Just like Wolverine.

The ironic thing is, I didn't realize Wolverine was actually my height until X1 came out. To prepare myself for the movie, I started reading about the characters online. I was shocked to learn that Wolverine was actually my height! And then I looked up the actor playing him in X1 and was disappointed to see he was 6'3"! I was like.........wtf!!

And this disappointment continued after seeing X1. I started buying and reading Wolverine comics. And I saw a character in those comics who was supposed to be short....my height.

So....yeah.....maybe it's because I'm short myself that I have this viewpoint on the whole height. Maybe that's why, for me, it is such a big deal.

The only hope that I can have is that after Jackman is done with the role.....at some point in the future they'll probably reboot the whole X-men franchise......and maybe then we can get a shorter actor to play the role.

Do you think Wolverine would have been as popular as he is now if he was made to look as tall and graceful as Hugh Jackman back in the beginning?

Is it a good thing he is popular? At the expense of other X-men getting shafted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WolverineXtreme

The only hope that I can have is that after Jackman is done with the role.....at some point in the future they'll probably reboot the whole X-men franchise......and maybe then we can get a shorter actor to play the role.

Heh, Jackman won't leave till he can squeeze every cent out of the character and in the process utterly destroying Wolverine's dignity in the general publics eye.

Do you think that there was any real conscious thought when the artist that created Wolverine made him short and menacing? Just think about that for a moment. I'm sure that those of you who have ever drawn or tried to make characters, the height of the character is an important aspect. It's not just a visual thing, but it's part of the personality you want to give a character.

It's a fact. Short people are different from tall people. All the short people I have known have always had a certain characterisitic based on the fact of people teasing them because of their size, and them always having to make that extra effort to get noticed. It's been happening since the beginning of time and will always happen.
All tall people I have met are mostly the same. They all share the fact that they have to look down on MOST people, and others commenting on how tall they are. Their personalities are in stark contrast to short people.

Back to the drawings. If I am creating a character and I make him short, I do so for a reason. I just don't make him short just for the sake of it. Something in my head is saying that this character has to be short because I envision a trait for this kind of character. Taking Wolverine as the example, we see how he has been portrayed in the comics and the cartoon series. He is menacing and always with a short-temper and anger issue. I am sure that the artist working with the writer decided that to best portray this guy's PARTICULAR rage, it has to come from a short guy.
Remember, tall people DO get angry also and are menacing. Sabretooth as an example. But the manner in which he is angry and menacing is in different taste to how Wolverine is angry and menacing.
I tell you this now. Do you think Wolverine would have been as popular as he is now if he was made to look as tall and graceful as Hugh Jackman back in the beginning?

Okay, to begin with the whole personality examination on short vs. tall is pretty much moot. People are different. That's just the way it is. I've know shy short people, extroverted short people, angry short people, calm, friendly, grouchy ect. ect. Same with tall.

Trying to base someone's personality solely off height is stupid, because hundreds of factors go into a persons personality. And it depends on the person how big a factor their height plays.

Now, I do agree that Wolverine's height was always meant to be important to the character. But forget all this in-depth examination of the psyche of short people. The answer to why his height is important can be drawn from one simple thing: His Name. Wolverine. A short, vicious, incredibly persistent, and tough animal.

Now, I will have to say, that after seeing Hugh in Origins, I'd be more apt to name him Bear then Wolverine, because Hugh was gigantic.

However, the main argument I have against this is that Jackman COULD have been made to look shorter. This is not his fault. And Jackman worked well with what he had in X1 and X2. The fact of the matter is, the scripts for all of the movies, even the first two, didn't let Wolverine really cut loose the way he's supposed to. Again, that's not Jackman's fault.

I would like to see a shorter Wolverine in the future. Around 5'7 to 5'9ish. I don't want to see a 5'3 Wolverine, simply because he's not drawn like that in comics, today anyways. He's much closer to a 5'8 height.

Okay, to begin with the whole personality examination on short vs. tall is pretty much moot. People are different. That's just the way it is. I've know shy short people, extroverted short people, angry short people, calm, friendly, grouchy ect. ect. Same with tall.

Trying to base someone's personality solely off height is stupid, because hundreds of factors go into a persons personality. And it depends on the person how big a factor their height plays.

Now, I do agree that Wolverine's height was always meant to be important to the character. But forget all this in-depth examination of the psyche of short people. The answer to why his height is important can be drawn from one simple thing: His Name. Wolverine. A short, vicious, incredibly persistent, and tough animal.

Now, I will have to say, that after seeing Hugh in Origins, I'd be more apt to name him Bear then Wolverine, because Hugh was gigantic.

However, the main argument I have against this is that Jackman COULD have been made to look shorter. This is not his fault. And Jackman worked well with what he had in X1 and X2. The fact of the matter is, the scripts for all of the movies, even the first two, didn't let Wolverine really cut loose the way he's supposed to. Again, that's not Jackman's fault.

I would like to see a shorter Wolverine in the future. Around 5'7 to 5'9ish. I don't want to see a 5'3 Wolverine, simply because he's not drawn like that in comics, today anyways. He's much closer to a 5'8 height.

^All of this.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

i think the height issue affects ppl differently. For some, it doesn't really matter. And i respect that.

But, for others, like myself, it is a big deal. And that's because, that's how wolverine was originally intended to be. For me, it is part of his character.

Just like truth said, the creators made a conscious decision to make wolverine short. Now whether it was originally 5'5" or 5'3", the fact is, wolverine was intentionally created to be shorter than the typical male superhero.

And the reason why i'm particularly passionate about the issue is because i'm wolverine's height! I'm 5'3" inches myself. Even if by some miracle, at the age of 27, i'm able to grow a bit more, i'm still going to be stuck around this height. So....yeah...i'm a short guy myself. Just like wolverine.

The ironic thing is, i didn't realize wolverine was actually my height until x1 came out. To prepare myself for the movie, i started reading about the characters online. I was shocked to learn that wolverine was actually my height! And then i looked up the actor playing him in x1 and was disappointed to see he was 6'3"! I was like.........wtf!!

And this disappointment continued after seeing x1. I started buying and reading wolverine comics. And i saw a character in those comics who was supposed to be short....my height.

So....yeah.....maybe it's because i'm short myself that i have this viewpoint on the whole height. Maybe that's why, for me, it is such a big deal.

The only hope that i can have is that after jackman is done with the role.....at some point in the future they'll probably reboot the whole x-men franchise......and maybe then we can get a shorter actor to play the role.

As "Nuff Said" commented, Jackman is really killing the character. Sorry, but he is PARTLY to blame for the abomination that was that film. He literally just was there. No aura, no emotion, nothing like Wolverine. Sorry, he is just too damn nice.

I really want someone else in the role. Really guys, is it such a bad thing to want the best? IE, someone who LOOK like Wolverine in the comics and IS a very good actor.

Now, you can try and attack me for being homophobic or you can see the dots connect. Bryan looked at Wolverine in the comics and chose Hugh Jackman. Bryan knew that Christopher Reeve was a classically trained actor and picked Brandon Routh. Bryan goes for looks and for people who look aesthetically pleasing. I believe his sexual persuasion has an influence on that.
Before you rush and attack me on that, just think about it for a moment.

Now, you can try and attack me for being homophobic or you can see the dots connect. Bryan looked at Wolverine in the comics and chose Hugh Jackman. Bryan knew that Christopher Reeve was a classically trained actor and picked Brandon Routh. Bryan goes for looks and for people who look aesthetically pleasing. I believe his sexual persuasion has an influence on that.
Before you rush and attack me on that, just think about it for a moment.

I think you need to be real careful about making this point.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

Now, you can try and attack me for being homophobic or you can see the dots connect. Bryan looked at Wolverine in the comics and chose Hugh Jackman. Bryan knew that Christopher Reeve was a classically trained actor and picked Brandon Routh. Bryan goes for looks and for people who look aesthetically pleasing. I believe his sexual persuasion has an influence on that.
Before you rush and attack me on that, just think about it for a moment.

You do realize that Christopher Reeve was an unknown just like Routh? And you do realize that in film, classically trained actors can be just as good, or worse then actors with no training?

Bryan Singer directed two good movies. They had problems with them, I agree, but I would ask how much input he had in the script. I do think that they could have been better, but to say that he ruined the x-men is foolish.

Secondly, if you think picking attractive actors for lead roles is a trait that homosexuals own, then all of hollywood must be homosexual. It's industry standard, it has been literally since cinema was invented. Studious don't like to take chances by casting unattractive people in lead roles. Sometimes they will, but they like to play it safe.

As for your earlier comment, the only blame I could see going to Hugh for Origins is the fact that he was a producer. But I would really want to look into that and see how much creative control he had. Tim Burton is listed as a "producer" for Batman Forever. He literally did nothing on the project. JS just gave him the credit because Burton gave him his blessing to make the film.

If Hugh said the script was wonderful, I do place some of the blame on Origins on him. If he had no control over the script, I don't blame him. Here's the crux of it.

EVEN GREAT ACTORS CAN'T DO MUCH WITH A CRAP SCRIPT.You literally could have put Oscar winners in every role in that movie, and it still would have been bad, because the script was bad. Plain and simple. I don't blame that on Hugh, and that's why I disagree with your assessment. You need to realize that actors very often don't have any control over what is written.

And on the subject of Christopher Reeve...he was also exceptionally good-looking (omg, those eyes ), and probably would have been complained about had the internet existed in the 1970s when he was cast, since he was an unknown theater actor and was reportedly quite scrawny when he auditioned for the role (even he referred to himself as a "skinny WASP" at the time).

Christopher Reeve did two great Superman movies and two awful Superman movies - and he did have some creative control over Superman IV, which was easily the worst of the series, despite being a classically trained actor.

And did I mention he was really good looking?

Good-looking actors being cast in major superhero roles didn't start because Bryan Singer happens to be gay.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

And on the subject of Christopher Reeve...he was also exceptionally good-looking (omg, those eyes ), and probably would have been complained about had the internet existed in the 1970s when he was cast, since he was an unknown theater actor and was reportedly quite scrawny when he auditioned for the role (even he referred to himself as a "skinny WASP" at the time).

Christopher Reeve did two great Superman movies and two awful Superman movies - and he did have some creative control over Superman IV, which was easily the worst of the series, despite being a classically trained actor.

And did I mention he was really good looking?

Good-looking actors being cast in major superhero roles didn't start because Bryan Singer happens to be gay.

yeah....I really don't see how Singer's sexuality has anything to do with his casting choices......or the quality of his films.

And for the record, my complaints about Jackman's portrayal have nothing to do with Jackman himself ( other than maybe becoming a bit too "complacent" in how he portrayed Wolverine in X3 and Origins. )

Jackman is not the one directing or writing the movies. The person I blame is.......Singer.

Singer is the one who chose to cast a tall actor ( be it Dougray Scott or Jackman ) to play Wolverine.

As a comparison, I like to bring up Watchmen. The character Rorschach is short in the original graphic novel ( he's like 5'6" or 5'7" I believe ). And his height is part of his character. He wears lifts as Rorschach and when the cops capture him and discover that, they make fun of him.

Well, when the director cast the movie Rorschach, who did he cast to play the character? A guy who his > 6'0"? No, he cast Jackie Earle Haley who is like 5'5" or 5'6". IOW....a short actor to play a short character.

And the general consensus seems to be that Jackie owned the role of Rorschach. He proved that you don't have to be typical tall and handsome to play a leading male role ( or a guy who kicks ass ).

THAT is what Wolverine should have been when X1 came out. The actor playing him should have demonstrated that you don't have to be tall to play the leading role or to be a kick ass character. That actor should have become the "face" of Wolverine ( and of the X-men movies ) just like Jackman did ( for better or for worse ).

And the actor doesn't have to be exactly 5'3" either. I say anything up to 5'9" would be acceptable, provided you cast taller male actors to play the other roles.

I mean, look at some 5'6" UFC fighters like Sean Sherk or Tyson Griffin. Those guys are not tall, but they're built like a ******* beast ( especially Sherk in the pics I've seen of him ). An actor of that height, with that build, would have been more appropriate for Wolverine than Jackman.

but.....alas....none of this came to pass. And that's because the director, Singer, chose to ignore that aspect of the character........

yeah....I really don't see how Singer's sexuality has anything to do with his casting choices......or the quality of his films.

Because it doesn't.

Quote:

As a comparison, I like to bring up Watchmen. The character Rorschach is short in the original graphic novel ( he's like 5'6" or 5'7" I believe ). And his height is part of his character. He wears lifts as Rorschach and when the cops capture him and discover that, they make fun of him.

Well, when the director cast the movie Rorschach, who did he cast to play the character? A guy who his > 6'0"? No, he cast Jackie Earle Haley who is like 5'5" or 5'6". IOW....a short actor to play a short character.

And the general consensus seems to be that Jackie owned the role of Rorschach. He proved that you don't have to be typical tall and handsome to play a leading male role ( or a guy who kicks ass ).

But for me, unlike X-Men, I had read Watchmen before I saw the movie, and I thought Jackie was the most perfectly cast role. But it wasn't because of his height. I didn't notice he was short when I read Watchmen, and I didn't notice he was short when I saw the movie.

His performance, on the other hand, was the best part of the movie. He was brilliant in that film. His looks didn't matter because he wears a mask for almost all of the film anyway. The only thing that mattered to me was his acting, which was great, especially in his last scene.

__________________”We live in times when hate and fear seem stronger. We rise and fall, and light from dying embers: remembrances that hope and love last longer. And love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside."

Guys, are you REALLY going to compare Reeve to Routh? You realize Routh can't act. You realize he did not go to the Giulliard Acting School that Reeve went to. You realize that. Reeve was unknown, but back then, ain't no way you are hiring a chap JUST based on his features.

Sorry but, the effect that Jackie Earle had would not be the same effect that a tall guy had. I mean, this argument is pretty straightforward. IT DOES MATTER. Even Jackman said at comic-con: "And they said I was too tall!!" He knows that it's a crucial aspect but he felt he overcame that.
I didn't.

Let's take another example. I hope y'all have seen Midnight Cowboy...hopefully. If not, just watch a trailer for it on the Tube. It's a great movie about the strange friendship between characters played by Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman.
The casting of this was VERY important. The Dustin Hoffman character HAD to be short. Everything about him, what he says, how he walks and how he operates all lends itself to him being short. Jon Voight's character HAS to be tall because his character only lends itself to a taller person.
You guys need to appreciate why there are such things as CASTING DIRECTORS. You also need to appreciate the intentions of artists AND writers who will say a novel for example "the man had a short, scrawny frame about him". These are important aspects. Bryan Singer ain't bigger than a character that has existed for YEARS.